We're just here to get to know the candidates and ask questions regarding the candidates views on moderation that may help in voting.

A few notes about the format:

The format is open, feel free to ask your question(s) unprompted, however please be mindful of whether or not candidates have answered the previous questions so that they don't get behind and start missing questions. Other than that, feel free to jump in.

Candidates, be sure to use the reply feature so that questions and their answers are linked together. (Hover your mouse over the left of the message, click the down arrow, click reply)

When a question is asked, I'll star it - please star it yourself also to help! Please save stars for the questions so that candidates can refer to the star list to make sure they haven't missed a question.

@TimStone will be creating a digest version of the town hall chat after it is completed. This digest will take the form of a question on meta, containing all the questions asked as well as their answers for easier reading.

There's a system message up on the site, so we may get some stragglers joining us.

I see the following candidates among us (in absolutely no particular order other than spot of eye): @minitech, @awoodland, @ThiefMaster, @jcolebrand, @Lix, @Sathya, @AndrewBarber, @kiamlaluno, @BradLarson

Two highly respected members of the community get in a comment war on a question. They both flag each other's comments and are cussing and it is clear that this is beyond a heated argument. What do you do, what don't you do?

@casperOne I really respect a well-moderated community and I know some small part of what goes into it. For all the help I've gotten from this place, and a little bit of ego/exposure, it's a no-brainer for me.

@TimStone In the past, this seems to have been handled by cleaning up the comments, only applying a lock if necessary, and warning the parties involved via a mod message. That usually seems to calm people down.

@TimStone First of all, I think the chances that "highly respected" users start something like this is not that big. If it happened anyway, I'd remove any comments that are not suitable (such as personal harassment etc. and other things that are of no use to the SO community). I'd also invite both of them into a private chat and try to mediate. I would not lock the post since that would affect everybody.

@TimStone two highly rep'd members of the community? I'll assume you mean over 30k, on Stack Overflow. I would immediately lock the post, clean comments, toss my head in the TL asking for help with mod messages, and then if nobody else had done so, send a mod message to each. I would also get help in monitoring their activity to make sure they didn't take the discussion to another part of the site. If they did keep it up, cooldown suspensions most likely.

@casperOne Right now, I'm more or less proxying what I want to do via a flag. I've been around for a while, know how it works, been a mod on another trilogy site & I believe I can help the current Stack Overflow mods in reducing their workload a bit

@casperOne Stack Overflow is an incredibly valuable resource that I've volunteered a significant amount of time for, and I'd like to see it stay as valuable as traffic scales. I've spent more time cleaning things up than answering for a while, and I'd like to help.

@casperOne I like making things neat and tidy. The Q&A format epitomises tidy, making sure it stays that way is a very good thing. There's also a hint of satisfaction in finding the smoking gun that proves someone is a sockpuppet or falsely claiming to be a happy customer of $spammy company$

@TimStone However, until everything is resolved I'd ask those two guys to stop messing around with each other. If the chat does not yield any successful results I would tell them to keep away from the relevant post(s) and, in case they decide to go on anyway, I'd probably have to suspend them for a short time (preferably only from commenting in case that's possible)

@JeremyHolovacs There's typically a correlation with that, I suppose. I'd classify it as someone who provides meaningful content and is generally familiar with how the site works to the point where the disagreement isn't just because one of the parties is "new."

@casperOne because I know that the Stack Overflow mod team needs help, and I can devote some time to helping. I really do want to see the site do well, and one way I can do that is community interaction, which I do. Another way I can do that is to help with flags as a mod. I don't have access to the 10k tools yet (what can I say, I'm not a rep-whore) but I am familiar with dealing with mod tools from Database Administrators, which is a low volume moderation site.

@TimStone I don't take sides. Lock the post and confer with my more learned and experienced moderators. Cleaning up the mess is obviously urgent in the event of swear words or any other possibly offensive slurs. Depending on the situation a firm mod message or suspension might be in order - to not take sides, again, both parties would receive the same "disciplinary" actions.

<---- Who wants to work with this guy? There's a current crop of SO moderators, and we all vary in terms of the amount of work we put in, how we interpret different scenarios, as well as how well we handle decisions that are made regarding the site, whether it be by SE or other SO moderators. What are the positive qualities that will help you acclimate to this, as well as your negative qualities which could be issues when working with other moderators (we all have negative qualities).

@casperOne I really respect a well-moderated community and I know some small part of what goes into it. For all the help I've gotten from this place, and a little bit of ego/exposure, it's a no-brainer for me.

New users often are not accustomed to the Stack Exchange system, and sometimes struggle to present themselves properly, either in the way they use the site or their attitude. How willing are you to work with "problematic" users, and at what point do you decide that someone isn't worth the effort?

@TimStone If they were two users of lower rep, say in the 1-30k range, I would encourage them to visit chat, clean up the comments, lock the post, notify the mods in the TL, and encourage them to work things out via chat. The differences here, for me, between high-rep and low-rep is that I would send system messages to the high-rep users without hesitation, because "they know better".

@casperOne I want to work with the whole team. I think each person brings a different personal focus and set of opinions, so that helps a lot when seeking advice on how to handle things, within the moderator guidelines.

@casperOne As mentioned in my nomination I'm already very active on SO which involves the kind of cleanup duties non-diamond users can do. Being a moderator makes various tasks more efficient though - for example, lots of "not an answer" flags are pretty clear candidates to be deleted or converted to comments so being able to do that on my own would speed things up. Besides that, since I have lots of time doing more for a great community is a Good Thing(tm) which I'd actually enjoy.

@JeremyHolovacs Then we get chided (that is tongue-in-cheek), but eventually the flag has to be handled by someone. I don't think we've been into arguments over flags per se, but we do have different views on different issues.

@casperOne Since I already work with you, as it were, via the TL and migrations, I am happy to continue working with you ;-) ~ There have only been two moderators I have not worked well with, and I have used the community team for interactions with those moderators. I don't currently have any issues with other mods. I am often seen as too chatty by some, and my questions don't always register as questions with folks, they think I'm merely trying to talk over them :-\

@MichaelMrozek I'm absolutely willing to work with problematic users. Guiding them through the way the site works, cleaning up anything problematic in posts with a helpful edit summary, and properly explaining closing, if applicable. I decide someone isn't worth the effort when they're insulting or if they don't show any signs of improvement after... considerable... effort on my part.

@MichaelMrozek New users are vital for the site to continue, and SE is certainly a different paradigm than "forums", so it can take some effort. I think it's important for moderators to be patient and make sure new users have been made aware of the differences. But once it is clear they have been told, but still don't make an effort... it's time to move to 'moderation' as a tool.

@casperOne I think I have fairly good communication skills - I'm able to articulate my thoughts and feelings on a subject fairly clearly. (I can be a bit verbose at times). I'm able to stay pretty calm in the heat of things - I don't think there's been anything I've written or done on the site that I've regretted or thought looked unprofessional in my time here. Sometimes I get a bit frustrated though - I tend to walk away and take a break for a bit if that happens.

@casperOne positives: Already know most you folks being in the Mod chat, so I more or less know how the current Stack Overflow mods work. As a bonus, being a mod on a trilogy site for well over a year, I'm well used to the Mod tools, the temperament required, how & when to step in. I've also done some errors while moderating, and have graciously accepted - whether it was brought up on Meta or not. Negatives: Have bit of an OCD with that Mod flag light being always on ;) but I've managed to keep that aside.

Jcolebrand specifically, why is someone of low rep less than 30k? They account for less than 0.1% of the user base and as the current moderator candidates show there is no need to have anywhere near this much to be an active and productive member of the community. How would you treat people of less than 30k rep differently to those above?

You guys are going to be expected to make decision quickly and accurately. The volume of flags you handle is going to be higher than any other site. Do you trust yourself enough to make the right decisions with regularity? Or will you constantly question your own actions?

@JeremyHolovacs I am not familiar with the formal guidelines/rules for that, which I expect exist. I would follow them, of course. I expect that I will be defering to the experience of other mods - or the opinions of equally/lesser experiences mods, as I go about my duties.

@MichaelMrozek for new users, aside from spam users, I'm quite willing to work with new users, both in linking them to pages they may not have seen (such as faq) and I often edit their questions, demonstrating via comment that I clicked the edit button) and then I leave edits in the question that demonstrate the kind of information they need to include in the question. I then encourage them to vote and mark responses as "answered" via comments.

@MichaelMrozek I am always willing to help new users, and I cannot decide a limit until I don't know exactly of which problematic user we are talking of. Users are all different, and I cannot apply the same limit to all the users. If the user is willing to understand what I am saying, the limit is higher.

@MichaelMrozek that depends entirely on one key point: are they well intentioned? That's a pretty subjective thing to call sometimes, but with the exception of malicious users "giving up" is not really a call for a mod to make. There are mechanisms in place that handle this sufficiently well through community action on the content alone (e.g. question ban/answer ban), not the users themselves.

@MichaelMrozek I make use of the proforma comments user-script extensively, pointing out what's correct, whats not; what's acceptable, how a post can be fixed or what the user can do to salvage it. Ultimately, some posts are very bad - there's pretty much no way to get them correct - that's when I shut the door

@casperOne I tend to maintain a cool head when interacting with others, and I'm not one to use snark to express my opinions. I do have to admit that a personal pet peeve of mine is plagiarism. I do not tolerate much of that, and it is one area where I do become a little more emotional.

@TimStone If the cussing already started, I'd lock the post immediately and delete all offensive comments. Now I have time to calmly address both users in private. Whether a timed suspension is appropriate would depend on what they wrote exactly and if it was a first offence.

@MichaelMrozek For problematic users, who have demonstrated some ability on the site (say past 500 rep) I'm more ready to condemn their actions and invite them to chat for gentle reprimands, and corrective activities.

@TimStone Voting is always the first tool, IMO. Tools that I already have as a regular user. Voting, commenting, voting to close/migrate. I think Diamond Mod action should be the last resort except for the truly "Evil" stuff, like spam.

@casperOne I have no problem standing behind my decisions and answering for my actions. I don't think that the "unpleasantries" are different from any other situations (in the work place for example) where confrontations occur - being able to explain yourself in a neutral way that is understandable turns uncomfortable situations like these to civil explanations and voicing of all parties opinions. Ultimately if anything, every one gets an explanation.

@casperOne I'm always interested in other opinions as they are not only useful on a certain case but also make one better in general - you can always learn from more experienced people. Since English is not my first languages there could be misunderstandings simply due to bad wording. However, I think the chances of this are rather low since I'm active in English-speaking communities for about a decade now.

@MichaelMrozek Unfortunately, we have many users who are unwilling to put any time into being reasonable members of the site. We can provide some help (comments to not leave questions as answers, etc.), but many choose not to learn from this. For those who put some effort in, I tend to go the extra mile to help them become acclimated.

@funkymushroom It's always much more important to edit for the greater good. I also often comment to the OP to please review my changes and ensure that I kept the intent of his/her question in the case that I'm not entirely sure I kept the request.

@JeremyHolovacs In over a year of being a Mod, I've never seen that happen. If that does happen, I ask the Mods to take a break, create a private mod-chat room & try to resolve it out. probably get a community team member involved if need be

How much time to you expect to dedicate towards being a moderator? Do you feel like this will impact your participation on the site as a normal user, and do you worry about finding the right balance between the two to keep things enjoyable?

@waxeagle Both. I don't have a problem questioning my own actions if I feel like wavering, but that's the benefit to having a team of nearly 30 moderators. I don't actively have a problem most days with deciding what to do on a flag, but when I'm not sure I've always left it to come back to, and often checked into the TL to see what guidance others could give me.

@TimStone I've got my soul-selling certificate already signed and ready. I currently spend more than an hour a day using my 10k tools for moderation, and expect that would only increase, perhaps to a total of 90mins a day.

@funkymushroom There's a fine line that should be tread there - I try to respect the OP's wish as much as possible, but when the question's not a good fit but can be corrected in to a great question, I'll take edit for benefit of community over OPs phrasing.

@JeremyHolovacs The current moderators are all people who have proven that they can accept constructive criticism, so if you express yourself in a coherent argument for or against an action, they listen. In the past, I've argued against actions taken and always been satisfied with the outcome. Whether or not they do what I suggest, I understand the reasons for their position.

If there are virtually no arguments among mods, what is the value of the "what would you do in situation X" type questions? There seems to be a general consensus on proper behavior for a mod. What differentiates them?

@casperOne As I have stated in my nomination, teaching is my vocation. Moderating is an important part of teaching. As SO moderating, teaching isn't always pleasant. Actually, it can get quite frustrating. But in the end, the results are more than enough reward. Helping to keep SO clean and continue to grow is quite similar, and I expect it to give me the same warm and fuzzy feeling from watching the effects of my teaching.

@TimStone I don't think it will negatively impact my participation in general, altho I'm sure I'll spend more time with flags. I don't worry about finding the right balance between the two, I am just looking to make the site better for everyone. I already enjoy editing as I come across poorly worded questions/answers.

@MichaelMrozek Usually you can guess the intents of new users from their first contact (in this case, their question and reaction to comments). Especially site usage issues can usually be explained easily, both by a quick explanation and a FAQ link (e.g. to the editor help). If the attitude is an issue it depends on the case. If it's not serious a simple comment might suffice. If bad attitude becomes more of a problem a chat, private message or even something stronger might be needed.

@funkymushroom If the edit stops it from being "too localized" then it's certainly worth it. Most other edits on questions indirectly help the user anyway, by making it clearer and so attracting more answers, from people who might otherwise struggle to understand it. If editing changes the meaning of the question entirely then it's probably too big an edit to make. (The notable exception being taking old poorly formulated questions with great answers and making them into a canonical question)

@ErnestFriedmanHill As for specifics; I have watched closely my Flags and their results. I often leave comments, and when I flag incorrectly, often mods will leave instructive comments in response. (Granted, we're talking about 20 flags out of almost 2000)

@TimStone I think to dedicate at least 30 minutes per day. Being moderator will not influence my activity as normal user, if not in the case my activity would have an immediate effect, such as voting to close a question.

A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?

@JeremyHolovacs I assume we'd try to settle it by talking to each other and if we cannot get on common grounds the best option would be handing it to a fellow mod colleague. Especially if one of us was somehow biased this would be a good solution.

@ErnestFriedmanHill I can't recall a specific one, because I've learned quite a bit over the three years I've been here. I can speak to Meta Stack Overflow but that really doesn't apply here, because while moderating Meta Stack Overflow is important, in this case the election is specifically regarding Stack Overflow

What is your position on "Soap Boxing"? Is it ever okay to suggest an alternative solution, when this is not clearly answering the question being asked, but it is clear that the OP is on the wrong track?

@MichaelMrozek I am confident that everything I have said will stand the test of time and I'm willing to defend any previous comment, or admit that it was made in poor taste and remove it. My earliest questions and answers, however, merely show where I've grown as a programmer.

@MichaelMrozek I like that as a reminder that everything I put on the Internet, as it is, is there permanently. And in my case, I attach my real name to it, too. I think if an action is unworthy of being attributed to oneself and their station, it's unworthy to be taken at all.

Question: As moderators you will have super votes, that means that all your opinions you have now in the form of votes, that need to be backed up by other users or moderators, will fall like a hammer. No backing up, no opsies (not as in not being able to revert). You will in fact lose a lot of freedom and replace it with responsibility. How do you think you will handle it and for how long are you willing to do it? Why would you want it?

@waxeagle It's pretty rare for me to flag way off-base. I don't think switching to the other side of the queue is likely to cause that to change massively. I'm sure there will be things that surprise me but I don't think that's anything I can't adjust to. I've made mistakes in the past but the useful thing is learning to avoid them after.

@funkymushroom I lean toward editing the question to more clearly express the core concept. Not only does it make it more accessible to future visitors, but it can also help the asker get a better answer for what they are asking. I don't know that I can recall an instance when the asker complained about one of my edits.

@TimStone Depends on the issues. Things like bad formatting can usually be fixed quickly. So that would be the edit tool. If it was clearly argumentative the close link would get some love - most likely the community would have already started voting in this direction. If the question is bad with regards to grammar it comes most likely from a non-native speaker. If it's hard to understand due to that I'd probably try to improve it.

@funkymushroom I don't understand the first part, but I understand the second part. I'll answer the second part. I believe that when the OP is on the wrong track, the only solution is to comment appropriately, and if he/she cannot be convinced that they are doing the wrong thing, then move on?

@funkymushroom It is of course OK to suggest alternatives, and to politely inform a user if there is some unrelated problem with something they are asking. (SQL Injection, anyone?) But there is a line between doing so usefully and helpfully, and just hijacking a question. I generally feel the question asked should - at least also - be answered.

@BrunoPereira It should be noted that this is not entirely correct. There are few actions that are undoable in the system, I think it's incorrect to indicate that is the case ("no backing, no oopsies") in your question.

@funkymushroom I think that the answer should first answer what being asked, but then the OP should be told when he is completely out of truck. It happens with Drupal, where users don't understand it correctly, and write code in a wrong way, or in a not completely correct way.

@ErnestFriedmanHill honestly, too many vote to closures & bit of downotes to recall. No deletes since I don't have privileges. Learnings: Quite a lot believe that closure is permanent; hence if a question's not really bad - I try to leave a comment saying what can be done to improve it

@TimStone As it stands, I spend the majority of my time on the site helping to perform cleanup tasks, not asking or answering. If I needed to spend even more of that time on moderation-related tasks, it would not be a significant loss for me.

@casperOne I think I answered this partly in my previous answer (to casperOne's first question). I think that (ideally) all people that sign up and volunteer for a mod position share the same overall goals with regard the site. Common ground on those fundamental levels will be what keeps the machine running smoothly. Negative qualities? perfectionist I guess one negative quality is the relatively small amount of time (compared to other members) that I've been a member of the community.

@BrunoPereira I see that as a personal negative to the position at first, especially. It will absolutely make me somewhat more careful than I would otherwise be, especially until I am sure that my votes are 'correct'. However, it is not true that they are not reversible.

@BrunoPereira I am already used to super votes. I don't vote as before, normally, but when there are more than 3 users who already voted to close, I give my vote too (when I think the question should be closed).

@BrunoPereira Seeing as I already have that ability/responsibility on Database Administrators, I've already been acclimated to the concept of "super vote". I don't have a problem applying my votes on Database Administrators or on Stack Overflow or any other site, so I'm just as happy to cast my close votes at any point. I'm content with any vote I cast, and believe it to be accurate. As for how long, as long as the community will have me and my outside obligations don't make it impossible to do.

@Shog9 Those tools, and the various feedback from them, are the only reason I remotely think I'm qualified to do this. I think they provide an excellent 'training'. I am very comfortable with them, beyond in chat, where I am not that active. I spend a good bit of time casting all the 10k moderator actions I can.

@waxeagle As it stands, I have very few declined or dismissed flags among the many that I've cast over the years, so I believe that I would be able to handle flags accurately and in line with what the current moderators do right now. Where uncertain, I would defer to those with more experience.

@funkymushroom It's important to achieve a good balance between both. On one side the OP most likely has a specific issue he'd like help with, on the other side it might be a rather specific issue (let's assume it's not too localized though). However, most edits consist in rewording for clarity/readability and reformatting code. So I think the cases where you actually have to decide between those two directions are rare.

@TimStone I expect most days it'll be more than an hour - I tend to use SO to fill holes in time, whilst eating breakfast, taking a break at work and in the evenings which adds up to a fair bit of time. My participation at weekends tends to be higher too. My answering has shifted away from FGITW to questions that are still unanswered (or have answers which are lacking) when I get around to reading email notifications about them. I don't think that's mutually exclusive, I'd say complimentary.

@MichaelMrozek Patience is the key. Every new user deserves a new nudges in the right direction. In general, editing their post (if salvageable) and pointing to the corresponding Meta questions should be enough if they don't know how to use the site. The attitude can be a bigger problem, but unless the user is completely out of line, I'd let his peers (the community) attempt to correct it. A remark about someone's attitude from a moderator can be viewed as an imposition.

@RobertHarvey Is this a reasonable question? How can anyone know what they'll be bored with after one week until 8 days in? I'm certainly not going to be bored "one week in" but I for one only know that because I am a mod.

@YannisRizos A question should be migrated when it's a) not appropriate on the current site, and b) is appropriate on the target site. When it's appropriate on the current site, there is no reason to migrate. When it's not appropriate on either site, it should be closed.

@YannisRizos When I vote to close/migrate a question, I first look to see if it should be closed for some other reason than off-topic. If it's "not a real question" on SO, it's still not a real question on SF. If I vote off-topic, I only choose a site if I know that site's FAQ well enough to truly believe it is on-topic there.

@ErnestFriedmanHill I've had one question closed as a duplicate out of all my questions. I thought I'd asked it from a different angle that meant the answers would be suitably different, but I can see why it happened. I don't think I've had any downvotes on questions other than that one, downvotes on answers I've tended to discuss in chat, usually someone can see the reason there if I've failed to spot it and no comment was left.

As a moderator, you may cancel an open bounty on a question and thus refund it to whoever had set it. (Note that you cannot refund bounties that have already been awarded.) What do you feel is a valid reason to refund an open bounty?

@MichaelMrozek For questions and answers, I don't see that I would alter my behavior in any way. The same for comments, where I've always tried to be polite and professional (I'm not funny enough to pull off snark well). Overall, I don't think that much would change in that regard. Close votes are a different matter, and I'll be more hesitant to cast those.

@JeremyHolovacs I can't imagine that anything here makes me more qualified except my other moderation experience, on Database Administrators and on reddit. Otherwise I would have to say that I'm probably just as qualified as most of the other moderator candidates. I do know that I have age and age-related maturity on my side, but so do most of the candidates.

@waxeagle I would not constantly question my actions. Usually I'm pretty sure what I'm doing and I don't think you could do such a job efficiently when constantly questioning yourself. However, thinking twice before hitting the Big Red Button labelled Do Not Press is always a good idea. But in any case, at some point everyone will make a suboptimal/wrong decision - we are (hopefully?) all humans after all. In that case it's important to keep calm and fix whatever needs to be fixed.

@funkymushroom Suggesting alternative solutions is always a good thing, as long as the underlying intentions are to help the OP or further readers of the question. There's a big difference between "Your current approach presents the flaws X, Y and Z. Instead of working around you, let me suggest doing this instead:..." and "That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard! Why don't you just do...?" It's the latter tone that usually creates friction when suggesting alternatives.

@Shog9 As mentioned earlier, being a Mod on Super User since the past year means that I'm well aware of the tools available, the different routes & I do often tend to help other network mods in figuring out how something works

@Kalamane I would expect the community will deal with it via DV/CV/MV if necessary. "Entertaining" would have absolutely no effect on what I would do with it if it came across the mod queue, personally. If it's off-topic, it's off-topic.

@BoltClock That is an interesting question. I've never witnessed that occurring. Possibly the only case I can imagine is one where a user has abused the privilege of issuing a bounty to the detriment of their own rep.

@casperOne I believe I would become fairly autonomous nearly immediately, being in that pool of "already a mod elsewhere on the network" and given my 2 years or so history on Meta Stack Overflow and my three years or so on this network getting to know how everything works.

@BoltClock If the bounty was used to or had the effect of 'protecting' a question that otherwise should obviously have been closed and somehow slipped through the cracks for pre-bounty time, that strikes me as the most likely reason.

@MichaelMrozek at the moment I have the liberty to act on things I'm not 100% sure about because my actions (usually) aren't binding. I don't think deferring to the community on things I spot as a normal user is a big deal. I don't think I have any content kicking around that would look bad with a diamond next to it.

@funkymushroom In general, moderators steer clear of making judgments on technical content for answers, so unless users were going off in the comments or someone was flagging this as a non-answer, I wouldn't even become involved in this. As long as the answer is addressing the question asked in some way, it's a valid answer and it's up to the community to vote no this how they will.

@MichaelMrozek I think that it all depends on your (and the users) mood. As long as all interactions are civil I think that an indefinite amount of time can be spent nudging a new user in the right directions.. A user might need numerous "nudges" over the course of his "infancy" as a member. I am very willing to work with so called problematic users, language barriers, cultural differences and even the hell-bent users simply looking to vandalize posts.

@casperOne I think it could take me 1 month. I don't want to jump over the horse and handling all the flags. If the other moderators are used to do things in a specific way, I would like to understand that, first.

Unlike some of the other sites on the network, Stack Overflow has no shortage of Meta commentary on issues of moderation from the community. Given that some of this can be strongly opinionated, how will what gets brought up on Meta influence your decision making process?

@casperOne I think the 10k moderation tools serve as training for many of the judgments. Beyond that, I expect that the first couple times I come across something 'ugly', I'll be looking for some input from others, but after a few weeks, I should be generally autonomous.

@funkymushroom It depends how it's phrased. If it's combative then it's not terribly helpful. If it's clearing up a misconception then it's really helpful. If it's providing an alternative solution to the same problem then that adds a lot of value to future visitors, even if not to the OP, which is great!

@TimStone I have lots of spare time and using SO is something I consider leisure so I don't really care how much time I spend on it. It should be way enough though. I don't think being mod would affect my normal participation - often you even learn stuff from answering questions because you have to lookup things, too. I would probably do "mod things" and "user things" alternating unless there is very high/low load on one of the sides.

@BrunoPereira The instant close and deletion votes will change my voting patterns to be significantly more conservative. Unless something is obviously terrible content or completely out of place, I'd rely on the community first before casting a closing vote.

@casperOne I'm already quite autonomous being a Mod on Super User in a timezone which doesn't have an overlap of existing mods - coming to Stack Overflow it'll probably take me a week or so to get a feel for decisions and how soon they can be taken

@BrunoPereira Being a moderator evidently means thinking twice before taking any action. Gladly, almost all mistakes can be undone. My flag record is almost perfect, but I won't say that I'm not going to make any mistakes (the only way to achieve this is to do nothing at all), but I'm used to making such calls both inside and outside of SO.

@TimStone I think that is a great resource, and I believe my partaking of it as a 10k mod user is part of the reason I feel qualified at all. I would expect to continue to learn from what is posted there. Not to 'knee jerk' to every complaint, but to consider what is brought up and related policies and community feeling.

@TimStone Given my recent question that was downvoted highly about the current election cycle on meta, wherein I was gracious for the opinions even given the criticisms against me (except when users with no practical experience on the network want to criticize me), I think that speaks for how I'll deal with similar conjectures of my moderation ability in the future. IOW: I'm perfectly willing to be called bad names and told I did the wrong thing.

As a follow-up to Tim's question, Do you see contradictions between community consensus on Stack Overflow (expressed by votes, close/reopen, comments) and consensus on Meta Stack Overflow (expressed by stated opinions, faqs, votes)? If so, where, and how would you resolve them when they cause conflict?

@ErnestFriedmanHill I don't remember any serious cases. I think most downvotes I received were because I either thought something would be correct while it wasn't (so I deleted the downvoted answer to keep SO clean from "non-knowledge") or because I misunderstood the OP.

@JeremyHolovacs As can be seen from the number of flags that I've cast over the years, and the comments on my nomination by the current moderators, I already have significant experience with moderation-related tasks and am perfectly willing to be a janitor here. I know full well what I'm getting into and won't give up on this after a month.

@BrunoPereira That's handy in some cases, e.g. low traffic things that would slip under the radar otherwise, where it can be frustrating to see things slip by at times. In other cases there are plenty of dedicated users who are willing to pick up the same kind of things and comment/vote as appropriate. It might be nice to just be one of five sometimes, but occasionally a mod does cast the last vote of a group and it's hardly a deal breaker.

@TimStone My greatest tools probably already jumped out of the tool box and cast 5 close votes (or are close). One possibility would be to try deflate the situation with a firm comment hopefully ending the fiasco swiftly in the event of a comment argument.

@Shog9 I do see contradictions, yes; re-open/undelete/up votes on things that have no business being on the site, for example. I think the site FAQ/published guidelines, and well-expressed and shared opinion on Meta would generally 'trump' raw votes on main.

@Shog9 So far, I have not seen any contradictions. If there are, it is just because who votes to close a question, for example, is just a part of the users on Stack Overflow. It is normal that somebody has an opinion that is different from who voted on the main site.

@YannisRizos Don't migrate garbage. Don't migrate very old, highly voted questions that might be on topic somewhere else, because that can be disruptive to other sites. In particular, be very aware of what's on topic over at Programmers, and don't just use it as a dumping ground for all the off topic questions here.

@casperOne I can't imagine anything that I've seen that I disagreed with that hasn't already been brought up and resolved. If it's been resolved then I agree with the action, so I don't have a countering opinion. This isn't particularly helpful, but then again, I've been working with the mod, community and dev teams on the SE network for well over a year, so I'm not curious any longer about how things work, or why.

@Kalamane On SO, I'd delete it at sight. We hate fun here. On Meta, the community should probably deal with it. If it's extremely entertaining, it might stay for a while. Even Jeff Atwood posted entertaining off topic questions on Meta. But if the amount of fun gets overwhelming, a Moderator should step in. It stops being fun when Meta loses its functionality.

@MichaelMrozek From what I noticed moderators are not really treated differently when answering/asking questions or commenting. Since the internet never forgets I prefer not to post bad things in the first place and in case someone considers a question/answer to be embarassing so be it - it happens. We were all new and less experienced than nowadays at some point. Besides that, I don't think a proper but "odd" question would reflect badly on SO that much just because a mod asked it (a long time ago).

@ErnestFriedmanHill I am a serious conformist at heart :P That's not to say I wouldn't change anything if an idea were presented and it was my choice, but I'm not the kind of person who can answer a question like this other than how I am answering it.

On any given day, there might be 100 to 200 or so flags in the flag queue. I spent the last 15 minutes or so deleting about 30 non-answers, closing six to eight questions, and destroying one spam user. Does this level of activity intimidate you?

@JeremyHolovacs (Awkward question! I think most of the candidates would be great moderators). I'm more active in chat than quite a few of the others which I think is helpful. I've flagged more than most (all?) which puts me in a position where I've seen a lot of abusive actions and seen how they're handled (at least the bits you can infer from public info) by the current moderators. I think I have a level of professionalism which matches the best of the other candidates.

@BoltClock The prime case I've seen for this is a bounty placed on a question just so that the question won't be closed. If it's a bad question, the bounty should be refunded so that the community has the ability to close the question properly.

@funkymushroom If this Fr@zzinG is out of line then an edit is most definitely in order. The original poster (at this stage) is the important thing - but he has already asked his question as best he can. Once we have understood the actual question its perfectly fine to make the appropriate edits to bring the post up to the sites standards. After all - the original post's phrasing will always appear in the posts revisions.

@Aarthi One would have to define "blows up", but I would explain my reasoning and be open to criticism. I have in fact been the "flagging member" on a couple of those on Meta, and have explained my part of the action (as well as the Diamond generally doing so). Beyond that, the Meta post should be moderated just like any other post. Discussion is discussion, but if a Meta post about moderation itself needs moderation, so be it.

@funkymushroom I think I commented this on meta recently. I would post an answer that contains both well-explained arguments why what the OP is trying to do is a bad idea but also a solution in case he really wants to do whatever he asked for. If it's a question I cannot answer I would simply post my opinion on the issue in a comment. Depending on the question I might also keep the opinion out of the answer and post the answer containing just what the OP wants and also comment on the question.

@Aarthi I defer to other mods, publicly, and let the post get sorted out. I don't have to always be "right". I can make a bad call. I can also walk away from an explosive situation and let someone else deal with it, who isn't as emotionally involved.

@RobertHarvey No. Not in the least. I relish it. Perhaps a little too much! (You've been one of the aforementioned mods who left comments on a post I commented on, informing me of my mistake in flagging as spam)

@waxeagle hehe :P there's not much to be done; raise on meta; put a bounty; if that doesn't work; contact community team & keep pestering till you get it done! (unfortunately; the last bit doesn't always seem to work...)

Do you see your role as primarily dealing with issues other users bring to you, or will you be "out on the streets" so to speak, actively policing posts? Describe what makes the difference for you between letting the users guide the site, and you taking unilateral action on items not yet flagged.

@BoltClock There are several. From the top of my head: 1) The question should get closed. An open bounty prevents that, and the consensus seems to cut featured questions a little more slack, but there are cases when the question must go. 2) The bounty was placed to transfer reputation from one account to another. 3) The bounty was placed as entertainment (happens on Meta).

@casperOne For simple things, like spam or non-answers, it would take little time for me to get up to speed and start handling flags in those areas. For more nuanced topics, like what to do in the case of a "low quality" flag, I might need to take a little time to feel comfortable with handling those flags.

@TimStone My understanding is that Diamonds are meant to use their powers 'organically' (my own characterization); Deal with flags, and deal with things we come across ourselves in our normal usage. But we should certainly not be seeking posts to cast the first-and-last Close vote on all the time, for example.

@TimStone I would primarily be letting users "bring the problems to me" and just dealing with the ones I came across by nature. I wouldn't be out looking for things to be resolved, and as moderators, are we obligated to go looking for issues? We already have community moderation tools for those without diamonds to edit, close, migrate and the like. I can't see a need to pursue problems, except to handle them as I normally come across them.

@RobertHarvey I hope not me. I hope my flag count offers some evidence to back up the "sticking around" thing. Given what the moderators have been saying about needing help recently I hope (and think) everyone running is pretty serious about it.

@BrunoPereira Of course there will be edge cases where you don't want to force your opinion on everyone else. In this case I'd simply see what other mods think or let the community do the first step and e.g. step in with my vote after maybe half the needed threshold is reached by the community. However, in most cases I'd be fine since I think I have enough common sense to handle the responsibility that comes with super-votes in a proper way that benefits the community.

Two answers, both posted a few minutes after the question was asked, have substantially the same content. No edit history. The answerers accuse each other of plagiarism. You are alterted by a flag on the ensuing dispute in comments. What do you do?

@waxeagle Questioning your actions and reviewing the actions of your peers is the best way to expand your understanding of how people perceive your actions and thus know how to explain your point of view in the most compelling way.

Moderating StackOverflow is a huge responsibility, and will take up a lot of your time on a regular basis. What strategies will you employ to keep from getting burned out? If you do get burned out, how will you handle this?

@TimStone It'll be a mix of both - over at Super User it's me looking at what can be done as a Diamond + looking at the flag queue; but considering the size of Stack Overflow I believe I will focus more on dealing with issues users bring to me

@TimStone I regularly read Meta and am aware of the many arguments that have happened there. While understanding the consensus of the community is important, I'm more swayed by well-written arguments there and would more likely use those to shape my own opinions on matters.

@Shog9 I think I'm pretty comfortable with it all really. I've reported a few minor annoyances with it on meta (nothing too serious). I've used some of the less obvious bits a fair few times (the edit queue stats to look for contentious edits, the anonymous feedback, migrations etc.). Assuming the rest of the tools live up to the same quality design/implementation I don't foresee any big hurdles.

@casperOne Decisions that are similar to those I made as a regular user: Immediately. Other decisions: It's hard to put a time frame on that, since there are several different scenarios. I guess the second to third time I encounter a scenario, I'd be able to deal with it autonomously. That would probably take 6 to 8 weeks. There are - of course - some cases I'd always consult with somebody else first. No man is an island.

@Gilles I step in, show how the timestamps are barely moments apart so could not have been plagiarized, and encourage users to differentiate their posts with further links and examples, to show that theirs is the better answer for the situation. If one answer is more than five minutes after the earlier, I'll probably just encourage the users to downvote the latest content.

@jmort253 I think the best way is not to do the work in a 'marathon' fashion, but to spread things out during the day as time permits. That is what I currently do with my 10k abilities, to avoid getting tired of it.

@JeremyHolovacs I think we are all well-qualified. I think one of my advantages is my enormous amount of time - as a CS student and "computers guy" I'm spending most of the day on the computer anyway. Besides that I already have quite some experience in moderation-related tasks (not on SO but from other big communities). Oh, and I'm nice. But then again - all of us probably are. ;)

Where do you stand on things like the controversial Zalgo answer? Would you describe that answer as helpful, informative, annoying or vandalism? If it was up to you, what would be done with that answer?

@Sathya @jcolebrand and @kiamlaluno are both mods on other sites. Sathya, you're a mod of a trilogy site. How do you intend to handle the load of moderating multiple SE sites, and why do you think being "doubled up" could/would be a strength?

@YannisRizos I think this link: chat.stackexchange.com/… pretty much answers that. I noticed fairly on a tendency to shovel off bad questions to certain other sites by some users and I've tried to avoid being a part of that. I've raised a few flags that amounted to "please don't let this win a migration vote, it's currently winning and really shouldn't".

@KendallFrey I would describe that answer as helpful and informative, because if you can understand that answer, you're going to understand the premise involved in asking the question in the first place. I think that answer should be enshrined in every HTML programming book forever.

@YannisRizos Moderating chat.se is generally a light breeze, the things that scare me about moderating chat.so are the number of (alleged!) foreign language rooms, and for that we need moderators such as @Sathya to help (only one man, we need many multilingual users)

@YannisRizos It'll be an excuse for me to get into it (chat, that is). I am not really active in chat now. I understand it's a different beast, but it's the same general community. Honestly, it's not part of the job that I salivate over doing, but yes; I feel ready to dive into that, too.

@TimStone I'm on the site pretty much as much as my eyes are open. I've got bookmarks in my phones browser and regularly answer to comment questions or clarification requests from my mobile phone. I plan to spend as much time on the site moderating and participating as the moderator team needs my help and as much as the question askers on the site need technical assistance.

@RobertHarvey Certainly not. While I assume whoever gets on place 4 in the selection would be asked if he wanted to step up in such a case I think it would be pretty ungrateful towards the community who elected you to simply quit for no good reason.

@casperOne As I'm sure you're aware, I recently argued against the deletion of a particular question that, while now off-topic for the site, had in my opinion valuable content within it. In the argument of deletion vs. non-deletion, I tend to fall on the side of not deleting older content that no longer fits the site, but which has some value within it. I respect the moderator who took this action, and I just was arguing this on the basis of this one particular case.

@Aarthi as I've mentioned elsewhere, the workload for moderating Database Administrators is minimal at best, but I still consider it "home base" currently on the network, even tho I've been a metahead and stacker for much longer. I don't think the load from dba would diminish my ability to moderate Stack Overflow at all. It would be a strength because I would be coming in with knowledge already on how to moderate, and so could do a great job on day one, rather than day twenty one.

@Aarthi It's a strength because it helps on avoiding handling all the possible flags in a single site. Drupal Answers doesn't have the same volume of flags, but temporary focusing on a different site helps.

@TimStone I think the time of a SO moderator is better spent by dealing with flags. We have thousands of users that can go through our millions of posts, but we only have a handful of moderator to act on the flags they raise.

@Aarthi As it is I devote an equal amount of time to Stack Overflow & Super User - the Super User community's quite balanced & often takes care of itself - there isn't much of a workload that it'd overwhelm me. It's a strength because as a Mod on an existing site you already know what you're going to deal with - you know how things ought to be handled.

@BoltClock rep transfer attempts (there's another issue there though!). Use of bounties to protect bad questions from closure votes. The bounty documentation is pretty clear on how they work though, so it's not something I think needs doing particularly regularly and not just for "I didn't realise they worked like that".

@GraceNote I hope people go back and revise their thoughts on the candidates they've voted for thus far based on who has and has not contributed here, and how they feel the answers have stacked up. In addition, I encourage everyone here to vote for Brad L instead of assuming he'll get votes on the final days of the election ;-)

@GraceNote I appreciate this community so much for all the help and fine-tuning is has provided me, and I appreciate the chance to give back to it for a while as a potential diamond mod. I know a bit of many of the other candidates, and I think we'll have some fine additions, whether I'm among them or not.

@casperOne hard to quantify. There are plenty of cases where I think the decisions are fairly obvious. There are some things I've flagged where I'm not quite sure what appropriate, proportionate actions would be. In those cases I'd need to see one or two instances and discuss them (in private) to get a feel for what the current approach is and avoid tacking action that would be way out of line with current moderators.

@GraceNote Final thoughts: My best wishes to all candidates - whether I do get elected as a Mod or not; life goes on; I'll be in Mpd chat helping out fellow mods; will be on site cleaning up the cruft.

@RobertHarvey Not at all. Given that I might have been one to throw a pile of those non-answers on the queue, and it takes longer to track them down than deal with them, I have no problem working through that regularly.

@TimStone that's a tricky balance to strike, it's hard to gauge public support for people who happen to be good at shouting loudly. The key things are a) do they make a good argument? and b) does it make SO/the Internet a better place those need to be placed higher than one or two who shout loudly.

@Lix I think that Brad Larson has shown outstanding dedication to the site and that he has been overlooked repeatedly, as people expect him to be a shoe-in for a moderator badge, and so elect someone else. I'm hoping that people in this election keep that in mind and vote for the three candidates they think are the strongest, regardless of what you expect anyone else to do.

@TimStone It'll be a little harder to take the time to search out problematic content with the volume of flags that need to be handled, but I do see myself performing tasks like running quick searches for non-answers or spam, as well as actively policing some of the more problematic areas of the site like [facebook].

@Aarthi I'd calmly explain my actions. I would leave taking actions on the Meta posts to others, as I'm one of the parties. If there's even the slightest doubt that I made a mistake, I'd directly consult my fellow moderators.

@casperOne Should happen pretty quick. However, I'd certainly ask for a second opinion at the beginning for non-standard cases (especially stuff non-diamond users never deal with) to see how others with more experience handle them.

@jmort253 I spread out my time on the site across the day, and I think handling things in smaller pieces is an effective way of dealing with this. I haven't been burned out after performing the same tasks here for three years, so I don't think that I'd be unable to handle the constant load of being a moderator.